Economic mechanisms for stimulating the development of entrepreneurial structures of the agro-industrial complex: world experience and opportunities for Ukraine

Анотація

In this article the author analyzed the criterion of prioritizing the identification and analysis of the productivity of economic instruments of the agro-industrial complex affecting the evolution of entrepreneurial frameworks in Ukraine, as well as the comparative study of this phenomenon in Poland, Germany, Brazil, and the Netherlands. The research focuses on the necessity to comprehend the economic tools that may contribute to entrepreneurial performance the most and how foreign experience may be used to regulate the policies in transition countries.

Methods. A panel data econometric model is used to quantify the effects of different economic processes on the agro-industrial entrepreneurship in the 2022 2024 period. Such variables are contained in the model as subsidies, tax incentives, credit access, digitalization, export support, R&D investment, human capital and institutional quality. The information was gathered through the use of international databases and national statistical services. Fixed-effects and generalized method of moments methods have been used to make the estimation robust and overcome any possibility of endogeneity.

Results. This evidence shows that access to credit, digitalization, and human capital are the three most powerful contributors to entrepreneurial growth of the agro-industrial sector in all countries. The key determinants of the performance of Ukraine are the mechanisms of subsidies and credit, and the efficiency of the tools associated with innovations, including R&D and digital support, is low. On the contrary, Germany and the Netherlands reflect high reliance on institutional quality, human capital and technological modernization. Poland provides a moderate policy regime, whereas Brazil is more dependent on financial considerations. The cross-country comparison demonstrates the shortcomings of the structure of policy environment in Ukraine and the prospect of adjusting global approaches.

Conclusions. As the research establishes, stimulation of agro-industrial entrepreneurship is a complex and integrated task that should be fulfilled with the help of financial, institutional, and innovation-based instruments. Ukraine should abandon the system of direct state support to one that facilitates institutional changes, investment in agrarian education, and the digital transformation. The present econometric model allows the development of evidence-based policymaking and the establishment of the way towards future studies of regional differentiation and sustainable entrepreneurship in agri-food systems.

Purpose. The article examines the criteria of defining and evaluating economic tools in Ukrainian agro-industrial complex through a comparative analysis with Poland, Germany, Brazil, and Netherlands. It examines the effect of certain mechanisms on entrepreneurship and the role of international experience as a means of enhancing policy in transition economies. The question is how the best tools toward maximizing the competitiveness and sustainability are determined whether they are financial, institutional or innovation based.

Methods. A panel data econometric model spanning 2022 to 2024 is implemented to evaluate the impacts of subsidies, tax incentives, credit availability, digitalization, export support, R&D investment, human capital, and institutional quality. The origin of data included international databases and national statistics. To be robust and considering possible endogeneity, fixed-effects and generalized method of moments were employed.

Results. The most power plants of agro-industrial entrepreneurship in the countries under study were access to credit, digitalization, and human capital. In Ukraine, low interest rates and subsidies prevail whereas the instruments related to innovation, i.e. R&D and digital support, are insufficient. Germany and the Netherlands boast of good institutions, educated labor and modernization technology. Poland shows moderate and balanced model of a policy, whereas Brazil still depends on the financial mechanism. In the comparison, the structural gaps in the policy design of Ukraine are highlighted.

Conclusions. Agro-industrial entrepreneurship involves a combination of financial, institutional restructuring, and innovation policies. Ukraine needs to move to capacity building aids based on digital tools, education, and governance with fewer direct aids. The model proposed is useful when it comes to formulating data-based policies and provides a framework with regards to eventual inquiries into sustainable regional entrepreneurship within the agri-food systems.